On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 12:31:33 -0400 Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> wrote: > Neil Williams wrote: > > I'd agree that BOTH of these should be able to read the .mo just > > like the application itself. > > .mo files do not exist when debconf preconfigures packages. Unless you > want to stick them in control.tar.gz and deal with them in > /var/lib/dpkg/info/. When debconf l10n was being developed, this was > thought to be a bad idea. Yes, I agree - the original was sent in haste, I realised later why this wasn't such a good idea. > A better way to save space would be to remove debconf's templates > database, and have it use the .templates files directly as its > database. This would save in the neighborhood of 8-10 mb, or more > generally, 2x the total size of all the .templates files. That's a very good idea, thanks! In most cases, Emdebian will use cdebconf instead of debconf because we're removing Perl from essential and doing without perl in the rootfs (and probably most installations). (Also dropping python etc. and using busybox/dash instead of bash, we aren't just picking on perl.) > (To save just 1x, you can just turn off retention of the backup copy > of the database, This needs no code changes at all, just set Backup: > false in debconf.conf.) I'll make a note to test that with cdebconf. > Compressing the templates files would also save several mb, > more space than would be saved converting them to .mo files. Thanks. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpjNo4lA_M74.pgp
Description: PGP signature